Jump to content
  TPR Home | Parks | Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Instagram 

Six Flags Great Adventure (SFGAdv) Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

I still stand by what I had said pages and pages ago. X-Flight cookie cutter in the place of B&R:TC. I can not see them build a wooden coaster on the Gotham side of the park, it just doesn't fit into the theme!

 

A) SFGAdv doesn't give two shits about "theme", and that's the cold hard truth.

 

B) Why wouldn't it fit the theme? SFMM has a wooden coaster themed to the apocalypse. You can theme any coaster to anything you want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A) SFGAdv doesn't give two shits about "theme", and that's the cold hard truth.

 

SHENANIGANS! They CLEARLY themed Superman with the air force tent! Also, Nitro has a lot of corrugated steel which, uh, well, is generally used in shanty towns and favelas where there are plenty of drug-making instruments that happen to EXPLODE when not used properly! HA!! THEMEING!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are my thoughts on what I've said and what you all said:

Giga: I haven't heard about Six Flags saying they won't install any hypers anymore. That, IMO, would be a horrible decision. If someone can find this, please post a link. I'd love to read that. But back to my point- an Intamin Giga would undoubtedly be the BEST thing for marketing, and would put them in CP's height categories. I've also heard rumors about a Giga. It will not fit in RT's spot unless its an out and back that stretches past KK or Bizarro. I want this most, and I think may of us do.

 

Wing: Great Adventure has enough inverting B&M's. this would do nothing for the park, except up the coaster count.

 

4D: I've heard B&M is working on this , so it is a possibility. I would imagine it would be a like a wing coaster with rotating seats. Better than a wing coaster, but still not what they need.

 

Wooden coaster: This is probably what they need, given El Toro is the only woodie now. As for RMC vs a less intense traditional coaster, if they choose to go RMC, which seems likely given Great Advenure and SFMM are the only larger market SF parks without one. This could be great for the park if placed in Old Country and is different from El Toro and breaks records. Imagine the #1 and #2 woodies in the same park

A less intense woodie would be great for the park too, but I'm not sure this is going to happen.

 

Launched: This is also greatly needed. If its like Maverick, this would be fantastic. They need a launched coaster that isn't just for height and speed like Maverick.

 

We've determined it'll be either in RT footprint or Old Country. Old country is probably the better option to revive that area and half of the park, and I hope they develop the RT footprint without a coaster. There is enough draw in that area that a coaster isn't needed as much as the other side of the park.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Giga: I haven't heard about Six Flags saying they won't install any hypers anymore. That, IMO, would be a horrible decision. If someone can find this, please post a link. I'd love to read that.

 

They never said they wouldn't do hypers again, but after Tatsu was built they said they would never again spend that amount of money on a single ride (21 million dollars).

 

Since then X-fligt is about as expensive as they have gone in recent years (15 million dollars).

 

It seems to me that they are very focused right now on adding cost efficient rides like Full Throttle and Superman (6 million dollars each) and the RMC rides (they are about 10 million dollars each). They could probably do some big-ass investment for Great Adventure if they saw the need for it, but the recent years focusing on new cost efficient rides have shown to be very successful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Giga: I haven't heard about Six Flags saying they won't install any hypers anymore. That, IMO, would be a horrible decision. If someone can find this, please post a link. I'd love to read that.

 

They never said they wouldn't do hypers again, but after Tatsu was built they said they would never again spend that amount of money on a single ride (21 million dollars).

 

Since then X-fligt is about as expensive as they have gone in recent years (15 million dollars).

 

It seems to me that they are very focused right now on adding cost efficient rides like YOLOcoaster and Superman (6 million dollars each) and the RMC rides (they are about 10 million dollars each). They could probably do some big-ass investment for Great Adventure if they saw the need for it, but the recent years focusing on new cost efficient rides have shown to be very successful.

 

That's a good point. Wasn't 2006 a huge year for Six Flags? Tatsu, El Toro, Goliath at SFOG, and maybe others? Six Flags just doesn't do that these days. Only one top to bottom new coaster this year that is not extremely expensive (I think), an I-box retrack for a much smaller woodie, a kiddie coaster, and a portable relocation. These together probably don't cost more than $30 million or so.

 

Speaking of, I've always found it interesting that Great Adventure made possibly their best and worst investments back to back in terms of cost vs. ROI in Kingda Ka than El Toro. I've heard over $125 million for current total cost of Kingda Ka including maintenance and running cost tossed around, I don't know if this is accurate or not. Then El Toro, which was half the ticket price at $12 million, and far better in terms of maintenance and other costs. Curious as to why SF didn't invest in more Intamin Woodies. Far better reliability than other Intamin projects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, that was also when Shapiro was in charge of the parks. He left in 2010. Though they do seem to be following his lead. I mean, aren't Fiesta Texas, St. Louis and Discovery Kingdom (which doesn't have the height allowance to do one anyway) the only Six Flags parks without hypers now? (Not including Great Escape, as it's not flagged.)

 

I think Six Flags has discovered that they only need new big coasters every 5 years or so, and are sticking to that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've heard over $125 million for current total cost of Kingda Ka including maintenance and running cost tossed around

 

Believe me when I say that is complete bullcrap, even ridiculous that someone would start spreading something like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, that was also when Shapiro was in charge of the parks. He left in 2010. Though they do seem to be following his lead. I mean, aren't Fiesta Texas, St. Louis and Discovery Kingdom (which doesn't have the height allowance to do one anyway) the only Six Flags parks without hypers now? (Not including Great Escape, as it's not flagged.)

 

I think Six Flags has discovered that they only need new big coasters every 5 years or so, and are sticking to that.

Great Adventure's last major coaster investment was in 2006. That's 9 years ago. It's time, we know it, and Six Flags knows it most likely. Six Flags needs to realize that SFMM can wait for 20 for a few years. Cedar Point doesn't feel the need to "compete" with them anymore, so why get to 20 as quickly as they are if there is no true rush?

 

If Magic Mountain gets a major coaster in 2015 or 2016 (over $15 million) before Great Adventure does, I for one will not be happy with Six Flags Inc. Cedar Fair understands that your flagship park doesn't need to have a new coaster every year to be successful. Cedar Point is the best amusement park I've ever been to, and took 5 years off to invest in the other parks in the chain, and are doing so in 2014 with Kings Island and 2015 with Carowinds/Kings Dominion (possibly).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The locals from the SFGAdv area posting in this thread are borderline delusional. There is nothing wrong with the current coaster line-up at SFGAdv. The park doesn't NEED any type of coaster. Yes, it will be great when something new is built, but when the park keeps pulling in the attendance numbers it does spending that much money on a new coaster is not necessary. I for one don't care if Six Flags builds crappy coasters at SFMM.

 

Sure it would be great to get a RMC or a launch coaster with a layout, but I really don't care for B&M WingRiders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've heard over $125 million for current total cost of Kingda Ka including maintenance and running cost tossed around

 

Believe me when I say that is complete bullcrap, even ridiculous that someone would start spreading something like that.

 

That is why I said in the same sentence that I don't know if that is true or not, and was looking for verification if that is accurate. I wasn't spreading a rumor, please include the entire quote if you would like to use my words. I would appreciate if you wouldn't blame me for something that you created by twisting my words like that.

If you want to say that number is inaccurate, great. Just don't try to make me look bad and call me "ridiculous." If you have something that lists the estimated total cost of Kingda Ka to Six Flags Great Adventure since construction, please share.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, that was also when Shapiro was in charge of the parks. He left in 2010. Though they do seem to be following his lead. I mean, aren't Fiesta Texas, St. Louis and Discovery Kingdom (which doesn't have the height allowance to do one anyway) the only Six Flags parks without hypers now? (Not including Great Escape, as it's not flagged.)

 

I think Six Flags has discovered that they only need new big coasters every 5 years or so, and are sticking to that.

Great Adventure's last major coaster investment was in 2006. That's 9 years ago. It's time, we know it, and Six Flags knows it most likely. Six Flags needs to realize that SFMM can wait for 20 for a few years. Cedar Point doesn't feel the need to "compete" with them anymore, so why get to 20 as quickly as they are if there is no true rush?

 

If Magic Mountain gets a major coaster in 2015 or 2016 (over $15 million) before Great Adventure does, I for one will not be happy with Six Flags Inc. Cedar Fair understands that your flagship park doesn't need to have a new coaster every year to be successful. Cedar Point is the best amusement park I've ever been to, and took 5 years off to invest in the other parks in the chain, and are doing so in 2014 with Kings Island and 2015 with Carowinds/Kings Dominion (possibly).

Great way to sum it up! I completely agree with you. SFGAdv deserves something new before Magic Mountain. I feel like they are being sloppy with MM, and just throwing them in there to throw them in there. GAdv definitely has the quality on there side(with the exception of a few). One of the few things that I'm not huge with about Cedar Fair is that they don't seem to put in as many attractions at their parks then at Six Flags. But at least CF understands that in order to make a well rounded park, you need something other than coasters. Which SFMM doesn't seem to understand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Magic Mountain gets a major coaster in 2015 or 2016 (over $15 million) before Great Adventure does, I for one will not be happy with Six Flags Inc. Cedar Fair understands that your flagship park doesn't need to have a new coaster every year to be successful.

 

Two things -

 

1 - I'm sure Six Flags will really take your concerns over how they spend their money to heart.

2 - Cedar Fair is NOT Six Flags. They actually know how to let people enjoy themselves while Six Flags just beats you down. It's kind of like comparing Disney World with Disneyland Paris. They're similar in many ways, but EXCEEDINGLY different elsewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt they would put a giga next to Ka. That would be kind of pointless.

How will it be pointless? TTD abd MF at cedar point are pretty close together. If anything it'll make ka look taller.

 

Dragster was built after MF. Every time a giga has been built, it was to be the thing that dominates the park's skyline and dwarf every coaster in sight. No one would build a 300 ft coaster to make their 400 ft coaster look taller, that would just be dumb (and an incredible waste of resources).

 

For Cedar Point, it was a logical progression, 200 ft, 300 ft, 400 ft. Now that SFGA has Ka, I dont see them ever going to 300 ft, it just wouldn't be worth the money.

Edited by Dr. M
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Magic Mountain gets a major coaster in 2015 or 2016 (over $15 million) before Great Adventure does, I for one will not be happy with Six Flags Inc. Cedar Fair understands that your flagship park doesn't need to have a new coaster every year to be successful.

 

Two things -

 

1 - I'm sure Six Flags will really take your concerns over how they spend their money to heart.

2 - Cedar Fair is NOT Six Flags. They actually know how to let people enjoy themselves while Six Flags just beats you down. It's kind of like comparing Disney World with Disneyland Paris. They're similar in many ways, but EXCEEDINGLY different elsewhere.

 

1- I know. They always do

2- Yeah, I agree. But I still think it's fair to compare them. Both are amusement park chains with a focus on exciting, sometimes record breaking attractions. I know they are also very different, but it is still, IMO, a good comparison.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^People can continue hoping for one of the most expensive coaster types out there, that no SF park has, and that wouldn't even be the tallest thing in the park, if they want. Personally I'll be hoping for an RMC, which could break records (marketable), is affordable, and is actually something Six Flags is doing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^People can continue hoping for one of the most expensive coaster types out there, that no SF park has, and that wouldn't even be the tallest thing in the park, if they want. Personally I'll be hoping for an RMC, which could break records (marketable), is affordable, and is actually something Six Flags is doing.

To market it, it would need to be taller than El Toro by what you are saying. In your opinion, how tall would it be? 200 feet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^ While I would love to see an RMC woodie at the park it isn't logical. We have El Toro and that wouldn't make sense to have another huge woodie. A giga would make sense because it is something that the US has only one of. It will attract so many visitors to the park. As for SFMM they are really overrated. Most of their coasters suck. I would rather have quality over quantity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, that was also when Shapiro was in charge of the parks. He left in 2010. Though they do seem to be following his lead. I mean, aren't Fiesta Texas, St. Louis and Discovery Kingdom (which doesn't have the height allowance to do one anyway) the only Six Flags parks without hypers now? (Not including Great Escape, as it's not flagged.)

 

I think Six Flags has discovered that they only need new big coasters every 5 years or so, and are sticking to that.

Great Adventure's last major coaster investment was in 2006. That's 9 years ago. It's time, we know it, and Six Flags knows it most likely. Six Flags needs to realize that SFMM can wait for 20 for a few years. Cedar Point doesn't feel the need to

"compete" with them anymore, so why get to 20 as quickly as they are if there is no true rush?

 

If Magic Mountain gets a major coaster in 2015 or 2016 (over $15 million) before Great Adventure does, I for one will not be happy with Six Flags Inc. Cedar Fair understands that your flagship park doesn't need to have a new coaster every year to be successful. Cedar Point is the best amusement park I've ever been to, and took 5 years off to invest in the other parks in the chain, and are doing so in 2014 with Kings Island and 2015 with Carowinds/Kings Dominion (possibly).

 

You may not consider Green Lantern or the new drop tower to be significant, but Six Flags and the general public do. I think GAdv. will get a new coaster next year anyway. Just be glad you aren't routinely shated like SFA, SFDK, SFSTL or SFFT. Heck, even SFOG is treated worse than Great Adventure!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use https://themeparkreview.com/forum/topic/116-terms-of-service-please-read/